C.F.R. » Title 10 » CHAPTER I—NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION › PART 2—AGENCY RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE › Subpart C—Rules of General Applicability: Hearing Requests, Petitions To Intervene, Availability of Documents, Selection of Specific Hearing Procedures, Presiding Officer Powers, and General Hearing Management for NRC Adjudicatory Hearings

10 C.F.R. § 2.326

Motions to reopen

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) A motion to reopen a closed record to consider additional evidence will not be granted unless the following criteria are satisfied:

(1) The motion must be timely. However, an exceptionally grave issue may be considered in the discretion of the presiding officer even if untimely presented;

(2) The motion must address a significant safety or environmental issue; and

(3) The motion must demonstrate that a materially different result would be or would have been likely had the newly proffered evidence been considered initially.

(b) The motion must be accompanied by affidavits that set forth the factual and/or technical bases for the movant's claim that the criteria of paragraph (a) of this section have been satisfied. Affidavits must be given by competent individuals with knowledge of the facts alleged, or by experts in the disciplines appropriate to the issues raised. Evidence contained in affidavits must meet the admissibility standards of this subpart. Each of the criteria must be separately addressed, with a specific explanation of why it has been met. When multiple allegations are involved, the movant must identify with particularity each issue it seeks to litigate and specify the factual and/or technical bases which it believes support the claim that this issue meets the criteria in paragraph (a) of this section.

(c) A motion predicated in whole or in part on the allegations of a confidential informant must identify to the presiding officer the source of the allegations and must request the issuance of an appropriate protective order.

(d) A motion to reopen that relates to a contention not previously in controversy among the parties must also satisfy the § 2.309(c) requirements for new or amended contentions filed after the deadline in § 2.309(b).

[69 FR 2236, Jan. 14, 2004, as amended at 77 FR 46593, Aug. 3, 2012]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2011–2024 · leading case: New Jersey Env't Fed'n v. United States Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n, 645 F.3d 220 (3rd Cir. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
New Jersey Env't Fed'n v. United States Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n, 645 F.3d 220 (3rd Cir. 2011). · cites it 10× “10 C.F.R. § 2.326 (a)(1) — (3). Reopening the administrative record in an NRC proceeding is an “extraordinary action.”
Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. US Nuclear Regulatory Commissi, 708 F.3d 63 (1st Cir. 2013). · cites it 7× “See 10 C.F.R. § 2.326 (a)(l)-(3). The NRC’s regulations impose three requirements: (1) The motion must be timely.”
Blue Ridge Env't Def. League v. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n, 716 F.3d 183 (D.C. Cir. 2013). · cites it 2× “NRC thus declined to reopen the combined-license hearing record under 10 C.F.R. § 2.326 . In late 2011, NRC issued its rule approving the AP1000 amended design, and in 2012 it authorized issuance of the combined licenses.”
Beyond Nuclear, Inc. v. NRC, 113 F.4th 956 (D.C. Cir. 2024). “See 10 C.F.R. § 2.326 (a). “Because we find that [the] NRC properly denied Petitioners’ contentions, and because the standards for reopening a closed proceeding are higher than those for admitting a new contention … we need not reach the application of NRC’s reopening…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.